ArticleNursing & health sciences2021
A comparison of the public's use of PPE and strategies to avoid contagion during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and Germany.
Article in Nursing & health sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between Compliance with COVID-19 Restrictions and the Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Poland.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Infection control management strategy for operating room during COVID-19 pandemic.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Nurses' response to the science of COVID-19 and variants.Nursing & health sciences · 2021Article
- A comparison of the public's use of PPE and strategies to avoid contagion during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and Germany.Nursing & health sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 pandemic has raised public awareness around disease protection. The aims in this study were to recruit participants from Australia and Germany to determine their use of personal protective equipment and COVID-19 avoidance strategies using scales designed for this study. Principal components analysis with the Australian data revealed two factors in the Protection from Infection Scale, Self-Care and Protective Behaviors, and a single factor in the Infection Avoidance Scale, with each scale demonstrating strong internal reliability. Data from German participants were used to confirm the scales' structure using confirmatory factor analysis. A comparison of the two data sets data revealed that Australian participants scored higher overall on protection and avoidance strategies but at the item level there were several commonalities, including self-care behaviors people adopted to avoid contracting COVID-19. With no foreseeable end to this pandemic, it is important that follow-up studies ascertain whether the public continues to adopt high levels of PPE use and follows government advice or if pandemic fatigue sets in.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.